Site problems?

Not able to post a comment.

---

by: Unabridged @ Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 16:20:19 PM UTC

Not only

Not only is the Southern Media and Opinion Research more recent than the Georges poll, it is also more reliable.

1) SMOR is an independent pollster, not connected to any campaign, while Georges's poll, especially if it was conducted with the intention of being released publically, may have been tilted to Georges's favor, or against Jindal.

2) SMOR asked a traditional ballot test question that all major pollsters use. Georges poll apparently asked the respondent and gave only two answers: vote for Jindal, or haven't made up mind or voting for someone else. The conflation of the last option is troubling, to say the least. For starters, its not a legitimate way to gauge Jindal's support, or anyone else's for that matter. The question seems to have been constructed solely for the purpose of bringing down Jindal's numbers.

---

by: Unabridged @ Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 16:27:50 PM UTC

(cont'd)

Second, and this is my biggest issue with this poll, traditional ballot tests, conducted by all legitimate pollsters, ask "If the election were held today, who would you vote for." The effect that has is that it puts people who haven't made up their mind but are leaning in a certain direction into the category of supporting a candidate. In the SMOR poll, Jindal's support can be broken into people who are "definitely" voting for Jindal or only "probably" voting for Jindal. Whether its hard or soft support, though, they still support Jindal. Georges's poll breaks that off. People who are only "probably" voting for Jindal haven't made up their mind yet, and so aren't reflected in Jindal's numbers. If we assume that the SMOR and the Georges poll used the same methodology and showed the exact same snapshot, the Georges poll created two categories: hard support for Jindal, and everything else, including soft support for Jindal and undecideds. That's not a usual way to conduct polling, and I have trouble lining it up against other, more traditional polls.

---

by: Unabridged @ Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 16:28:11 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

SMOR question

do they mention the party affiliation of candidates in their questions?

---

by: RBH @ Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 20:22:03 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I don't have their questions in front of me

But I'm familiar with most independent pollsters, and if SMOR is similar, then yes. Their initial ballot question would be:

"If the Election for Governor were held today, would you vote for:

Bobby Jindal, Republican
Walter Boasso, Democrat
and so on"

(That list would be rotated randomly from call to call, so Jindal wouldn't always be the first choice)

The reason behind this, and the reason its called an "initial ballot" test, is because when you go into the voting booth, the only identifier you have to go by is the name and party.

I can't guarantee that SMOR does this, but I would consider it very likely.

---

by: Unabridged @ Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 20:58:11 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Heard This Before

And in my gut, it feels that the South will be the South. For any significant change in policies for this country, we have to look elsewhere. Like the Rocky Mountain states.

---

by: StewartNusbaumer @ Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 19:56:20 PM UTC

lets trade anecdotes

California has Arnold.  Tennessee has Bredesen and brought us Al Gore.

Massachusetts brought us Mitt Romney and Connecticut has Joe Lieberman.  North Carolina has Mike Easley and brought us Terry Sanford and John Edwards.

Ohio in 2004 brought us George W Bush, and Arkansas in 1992 brought us Bill Clinton.

The Mountain West has brought us Colorado, with a significant Democratic shift, and Utah, where Bush might still be above 50%.

Lets try to avoid stereotypes please.

"Keep the Faith"

---

by: blue south @ Fri Aug 17, 2007 at 05:44:51 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Marmalades from Scotland, Rugs from Pakistan

Mexico has jumping beans and cars are from Japan
Clowns are from the circus, barking comes from dogs
Eggs come from a chicken and log cabins come from logs

- They Might Be Giants "Where Do They Make Balloons?"

Stereotypes.  :)

The South has brought us some of the greatest of America and enlightened places have brought us some of the worst.  Democrats can a do win in the South.

---

by: deepsouthdem @ Fri Aug 17, 2007 at 12:48:41 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Regardless of Trees, Forest Still There

People who don't like a generation often label it a stereotype. But mine is a contextual generation, and based upon a history. The South is different because of its history and it will, regardless of this or that poll, this or that victory or defeat in November, end up heavily conservative. Talk particulars if you want, but the South as a whole will again refuse to transcend its miserable past. For this country to move forward, it needs to convince people in the Rocky West and Southwest that the Southern policics must stop on the national level.

---

by: StewartNusbaumer @ Fri Aug 17, 2007 at 12:50:01 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

what's the deal,

this is the third time in two weeks I've been unable to post a long comment that I spent a while writing. Why can't I seem to post anything on this site anymore?

Call no man happy until he is dead-Aeschylus

---

by: ArkDem the Ragin Cajin @ Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 22:19:35 PM UTC

I've had the same exact problem.

Its most likely an issue with the new way of posting comments.

As demonstrated in my post, I've been able to break it into two parts and post them consecutively, but its still frustrating.

---

by: Unabridged @ Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 23:08:55 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I know this debate has happened before,

but mark me down as NOT A FAN of using scare quotes around Bobby Jindal's name.

At the end of the day, I do think it's race baiting.  "He's not really Bobby, really he's Piyush, and do you really want to vote for a guy named Piyush, or a guy who doesn't want you to know he's named Piyush?" is the message.  In other words, "he wants you to think he's one of you, but really he's The Other."  And pushing voters to not choose someone to lead them, because he's The Other, sucks.

If he had started going by Bobby five or fifteen years ago, you'd have a case for calling him out as inauthentic.  But if the accounts I've read, that say he chose the name Bobby for himself when he was four are correct, then I decline to buy the "he's inauthentic" charge, and believe that that charge is just a fig leaf for the real dynamic.

I'm open to argument, and I realize that saying "x behavior (that you are doing) is race baiting" is kindof explosive, and I don't wish to attack you, but I really dislike the scare quote thing.

And I realize this may have been debated ad nauseam, and if you're still doing it it may be because your side has marshalled some good arguments.  But still.  I'm left with a really strong immediate impression that something shitty is going on, so even if you can justify it, that reaction is something to consider.

28, gay guy, Democrat, CA-08

---

by: texas dem @ Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 23:17:27 PM UTC

I completely agree.

I know my opinion doesn't count for much here, but I meant to bring this up and forgot.

---

by: Unabridged @ Fri Aug 17, 2007 at 00:12:27 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Just curious

does Bobby Jindal have a middle name?

But in general, as someone who could use a variant of Robert, but doesn't. I don't mind if non-Roberts are using names like Bobby and such.

The quotes are a meaningless little add-on. Especially when the Louisiana secretary of state doesn't use them for his name.

(there's a lot of precedent for using nicknames instead of long foriegnish first names, Sonny Montgomery.)

---

by: RBH @ Fri Aug 17, 2007 at 00:30:56 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

"Bobby"

was printed on the ballot in 2003.  Since it is not his given name, his name will appear on the ballot as "Bobby," unless Piyush legally changes his name.  Everyone who registers with a pseudonym appears on the ballot with quotations.  I think of Patrick "Live Wire" Landry.  To claim the use of quotes is racist simply reveals one's lack of knowledge of how names appear on the ballot in Louisiana.

---

by: pointecoupeedemocrat @ Fri Aug 17, 2007 at 01:07:40 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

On checking

Yeah, it turns out that the website refers to Jindal as "Bobby" Jindal.

So yeah, be prepared to start using "Bob" Odom and "Buddy" Roemer.. just to be fair. ;)

Anyways, there's not really any way to convert "Piyush" into a nickname. I wouldn't wish "Pi" on anybody as a nickname either.

---

by: RBH @ Fri Aug 17, 2007 at 03:18:52 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

There is a difference.

There is a difference between a nickname like "Live Wire" and a nickname like "Bobby". For starters, Jindal uses "Bobby" almost exclusively, not as something to spice up his name. He also is referred to as Bobby in official documents, including by the Clerk of the United States Congress. I don't think Pat Landry can say the same thing.

Yes, you are technically correct that his name will appear in quotation marks on the ballot, but in every official document and newspaper article, he is referred to as Bobby Jindal. Unless you are typing up the official ballot for people to vote with, then putting the quotation marks around his name is, at the very least, a sign of disrespect. You can hide behind whatever excuses you can think of. The truth of the matter is that everybody knows exactly why you do it.

---

by: Unabridged @ Fri Aug 17, 2007 at 03:21:01 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Just curious

and I know nothing about Louisiana but is the system then that the candidate tells the SOS whatever pseudonym he or she wishes to appear on the ballot together with his or her last name or does it appear with the legal name, for instance, Robert "Bob" Barker or just as "Bob" Barker and must the candidate's whole last name appear or if someone has a long hypenated last name -- for example -- but commonly only uses part of it can he or she ask that only the part commonly used name appear on the ballot.  I guess I've never really thought about this.

---

by: Johnny C @ Sat Aug 18, 2007 at 20:25:16 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Nope.

Not sold.

How names are printed on the ballot, and how names are printed in newspapers, blogs, emails, press releases, and other ordinary forms of written communication, are two entirely different issues.  Just because the legal processes of the state dictate that names appear a certain way on the ballot, is not a controlling or even a relevant factor to how you and others choose to write them in your print communications.

If I understand what you've said correctly, then Billy Tauzin appears on the ballot as Wilbert Joseph "Billy" Tauzin II, or "Billy" Tauzin, or W.J. "Billy" Tauzin, or something.  And Charlie Melancon is Charles Joseph "Charlie" Melancon, or maybe "Charlie" Joseph Melancon, or just "Charlie" Melancon.  They definitely don't appear on the ballot as just Billy Tauzin or Charlie Melancon, and yet, that's how we refer to them in ordinary print communication.  That's because ordinary print communication is not controlled by, and is not even really influenced by, the rules of ballot nomenclature.

So, I say, your attempt to explain your use of scare quotes around Bobby Jindal's name, by appealing to the fact that his name will appear with scare quotes on the ballot, is disingenuous.  If that were really the reason for your actions, you'd be writing "Charlie" Melancon in every case, and I seriously doubt you do that.  No, that is not the real reason, nor is it a valid justification, for writing "Bobby" Jindal.  There may be a valid reason, and that valid reason may or may not coincide with the real reason, but this argument about ballot nomenclature is neither. 

28, gay guy, Democrat, CA-08

---

by: texas dem @ Sun Aug 19, 2007 at 00:32:25 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Melancon

was on the ballot as "Charles J. "Charlie Boy" Melancon" for his state house races in the 1980s (Source).

Now, that's a vote-getting nickname. Ha.

---

by: RBH @ Sun Aug 19, 2007 at 02:04:21 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

LAMediaWatchand I have been engaging

in really rigorous and extensive opposition research on Jindal at Daily Kingfish.  We have also interpreted the polls, and we are essentially the people to contact in the blogosphere about this race.  We look forward to future inquiries about this race.  And I am happy the race about which I have been writing for months is finally receiving some attention.  Feel free to contact us at pointecoupeedemocrat@hotmail.com or at lamediawatch@gmail.com if you need any help interpreting this race.

---

by: pointecoupeedemocrat @ Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 23:28:52 PM UTC

Where can I find analysis

of the most recent Southern Media and Opinion Research poll on your site? I noticed you had at least two front-page posts based off of the John Georges poll.

---

by: Unabridged @ Fri Aug 17, 2007 at 00:13:52 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Anyone who knows

anything about Louisiana politics knows who commissioned that poll.  In fact, the results reflect it.  But the person who contracted it was shrewd enough to have the results published without noting who sponsored it if the results were not to his liking.  Since I do not view it as legitimate, I will not discuss it.  But I imagine "Bobby" supporters will tout it, and they have.  And given recent polling, this poll is a major outlier.  Regarding the Daily Kingfish, we are the most informed source on this race.  And not citing one poll does not invalidate that status.  And were you not already banned from this site? 

---

by: pointecoupeedemocrat @ Fri Aug 17, 2007 at 01:05:28 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Yes.

Yes, my previous account was banned. You said that I did not posess anything "close to resembling a shred of intelligence", then complained that I was using personal attacks against you after I pointed out numerous inconsistencies in your logic.

1) Is there any proof that the Jindal camp sponsored, or has a history of sponsoring, polls conducted by Southern Media & Opinion Research, or are we just supposed to take your word for it?

2) Why do you not view the results as legitimate? Is there something specifically in its methodology that you disagree with? Or is your judgement based solely on what results it produced?

3) Even if Bobby Jindal sponsored the poll (though there's nothing to support that, but for the sake of argument), that still doesn't explain why you wouldn't talk about it on your site, since you dedicated at least two front-page posts talking about a poll sponsored by the John Georges camp. You clearly don't mind polls that are sponsored by candidates.

4) How can you possibly consider this poll a "major outlier"? This is the 8th poll done on the race and released publically this year. Jindall's support in those polls have been: {58, 59, 56, 39, 62, 52, 38, and 63}. Please note that the only two polls that have Jindal below 50% are the two polls conducted by Verne Kennedy on behalf of John Georges. If you subtract those two polls as well as this latest SMOR poll, Jindal's mean support is 57%. The SMOR poll that has him at 63% is a lot closer to the line of best-fit than any score in the 30s. Even if we include the two Georges polls, Jindal's mean support comes out to 52%. Which means that even when you include the two outlying polls conducted by his opponent, SMOR's figure of 63% is *still* closer than the Verne Kennedy polls. The poll is clearly not an outlier, no matter how you choose to look at the numbers.

5) I will not say anything bad about your site. You are dedicated to posting as many bad things about Bobby Jindal as possible, and in that regard, you are doing a good job. My only question is why you would refuse to even acknowledge a poll done by a respected, independent pollster while spending two front-page posts talking about a poll conducted on behalf of one of the candidates of dubious legitimacy. Even if you truly believed, for whatever reason, that the poll was illegitimate, why would you not post something on your site explaining why you thought it was illegitimate? I get enough news about the LA GOV race reading blogs like this and the National Journal, so I don't look at many Louisiana blogs. I cannot dispute your claim to being the more informed source on this race. I can only wonder though why you would outright ignore this poll, then turn around and claim that you have all of the information about this race.

---

by: Unabridged @ Fri Aug 17, 2007 at 03:45:47 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

you obviously failed

to analyze the results of the poll.  if you did, you would know who commissioned it. 

---

by: pointecoupeedemocrat @ Fri Aug 17, 2007 at 18:55:21 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I don't understand.

Are you saying that, because the results are favorable to Bobby Jindal, they must have been commissioned by him? Again, I ask: Do you have any proof of this?

Does that apply to every pollster, or just the ones you don't like?

And what about the rest of my post? I'm interested in hearing you explain how this poll is an outlier.

---

by: Unabridged @ Fri Aug 17, 2007 at 23:42:25 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

i did not imply

Jindal commissioned the poll.  there are, by the way, other candidates running or considering a run for the governor's mansion.  regarding the poll's status as an outlier, it does not dovetail with other recent polls.

---

by: pointecoupeedemocrat @ Sat Aug 18, 2007 at 18:48:46 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Interesting, if cryptic.

As far as being an outlier goes, thank you for confirming that your entire basis for dismissing it is because it doesn't show Jindal performing badly, which is where you would like to see him.

---

by: Unabridged @ Sat Aug 18, 2007 at 20:09:23 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

While Louisiana is located in the South,

we are a distinct entity.  Our demographics are different; our electoral system is different; our legal code is different; and our politics are different.  This is why Louisiana politics always eludes regional trends.  In fact, I think should be viewed as a Mississippi River state and not as a Southern state.

---

by: pointecoupeedemocrat @ Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 23:40:59 PM UTC

Good Analysis Trent

I wish you had been the one to cover MS - 03.  It your neighbor to the West anyway.  :)

---

by: deepsouthdem @ Fri Aug 17, 2007 at 12:53:04 PM UTC

i basically

came to the same conclusion days ago on daily kingfish.

---

by: pointecoupeedemocrat @ Fri Aug 17, 2007 at 18:55:59 PM UTC